Archive for April, 2007

Abortion Not Over Yet

April 19, 2007

My readers who feely ambivalent towards partial-birth abortion are stupid. That’s all I can say. I cannot repeat even a part of the procedure on this blog. I had to turn off Mark Levin as he read, on the air, the procedure. If you believe partial-birth abortion is somehow better than sacrificing your children to the fiery brazen idol of Molech, then you do not understand partial-birth abortion or you do not understand Molech worship. (I advise you to educate yourself on both topics. You’ll be a better person for doing so. Yes, mankind really is that sick and evil.)

Any human who can perform such a procedure is worse than a murderer. Any human who can request such a procedure is likewise. Any person who authorizes such a procedure is an accessory to the crime. I don’t know how you can draw any other conclusion. Having seen four babies delivered, I cannot imagine a doctor whose heart is so black or a mother whose soul is so dark that they can murder such an innocent, weak, and dependent person in the moment of birth.

I have long ago sensed that our purpose here on earth is not to secure for ourselves comforts and wealth. We are here to serve each other, to feed the hungry, to clothe the naked, etc… When we stand before the bar of Christ, and as we recall our past, only those acts of pure, selfless service will justify us. Every other act will condemn us, including acts of selfish piety. This is clearly recorded in scripture. I don’t know how any Christian can deny this.

Shall we enforce acts of kindness at gunpoint and threats of imprisonment? That is where I part company with liberals. No, acts of charity must be motivated by nothing more than our feelings of compassion and love to our fellow man. Having government forcefully seize our assets through taxes then distribute that money to the poor is not charity. It is slavery, bondage, servitude and morally unjust. Never did Christ force his will on anyone, including devils, except to free another from their unjust power.

On abortion, when we decide our own life is more important than the life of our child, we have fully succumbed to the wiles of the devil. After all, there is no neighbor closer than our own flesh and blood. There is no person on this earth whom we can love more than our own children. Those who would murder their children while they are still completely innocent and harmless, while they have yet to be born, for the crime of merely existing, are in my mind and heart murderers of the worst kind.

They will stand before Christ and have to account for their sins. He will ask them, “Why did you murder your child while he was yet in your womb?” They will answer, “Because I loved myself more than my child.” And they will be condemned. No one can completely understand the condemnation of God without experiencing it. By the grace of God, we are shielded from its full power for a time. But that shield will fall one day, and we will experience the full wrath of an angry God.

Not only does Christianity condem the murder of one’s own children, but every other culture as well, except modern Western culture. Never have I seen a society where the lives of the parents are placed as more valuable than the lives of the children. Is it because these societies do not last long? Or is it because these societies are condemned by God and destroyed by his power?

Our nation is a nation of laws, and yet those laws have been twisted and distorted in such a maniacal manner that the Supreme Court has found the right to murder your own children in a document written over 200 years ago to limit the powers of the federal government. If you read the decision and subsequent decisions, you will be hard pressed to find any reference to any part of the constitution that makes the least bit of sense.

One day, I pray that our Supreme Court will remedy its gross error. It’s not the first time they made an error (remember Dred Scott) and it won’t be the last. Hopefully it can be one of the few times when they will correct their past mistakes.

That day was not yesterday, though. Don’t fool yourselves–Justice Kennedy made it clear that he still doesn’t regard the constitution as anything more than an advice column in the Sunday paper. We still have a minority of judges that regard the constitution as the supreme law in the land and a majority that rule according to their mood and whim.

And as long as that is the case, children everywhere are under threat of extinction for the crime of existing.

Do not give up the fight. Do not stop praying, and do not stop campaigning for those who regard abortion as evil.

The Moral of the Story

April 19, 2007

Let’s consider the case of the Virginia Tech shooter.

When should he have been locked up?

Should he have been locked up when he first showed signs of psychosis and tendencies towards violence?

Should he have been locked up after he bought his guns?

Or should he have been locked up only after the first two victims were brutally and evilly murdered?

Or should we have waited until the shooter was done claiming his 31 victims?

The moral of the story of the Virginia Tech shooter, if there is one, is that threats are better handled before they become imminent and before they are realized. Any reasonable person can see the cost of stopping the threat early is much cheaper than the cost of having innocent dead strewn across a campus.

As a people, we have a right to lock away unstable people who may harm themselves or others in the name of self-defense. The shooter should have been locked up, probably for life. There may be thousands or tens of thousands more across the country who, like the shooter, show tendencies towards violence and should likewise be locked up.

As a people, we also have a right to address foreign threats, with force if necessary.

Now we face another threat. Another madman is planning to murder not tens but millions of people. He is actively building weapons to do so. He is, as we speak, refining uranium ore to obtain U235, an isotope which in large quantities can be trivially converted into a nuclear bomb. This madman is not only openly threatening Israel and the United States and Europe with nuclear holocaust, but is openly defying the civilized world’s demands to stop refining the ore.

Shall we wait until he has obtained the weapons?

Shall we wait until he has slaughtered the first ten million Jews?

Or shall we wait until New York City becomes like Nagasaki and Hiroshimi?

Or shall we wait yet further, until Iran claims the title of caliph and enslaves the United States, Europe, and Israel to sharia law?

Or shall we do nothing ever?

Ghandhi was a pacifist. He was also extremely stupid. He believed that had the Jews in the 1930s committed mass suicide, not only could the holocaust have been prevented, but World War II as well. I’m sorry, I’m just not buying the whole mass suicide thing. Shall we follow the philosophy of Ghandhi, and commit mass suicide now rather than waiting for certain death later because we refuse to resist? If you truly believe that Ghandhi was a prophet of morality, by all means, slit your throat now.

I believe Iran should be on the short list for a toppling. Perhaps it can be done without an invasion. Perhaps we can pull it off without even bombing the nuclear facilities. However, I strongly doubt it. Whatever it is, it must be done in months or weeks, not years.

Any action we do take against Iran, even unilaterally, would be perfectly justified even if Iran was not developing nuclear weapons. When Iran exports weapons to the battlefield in Iraq, when they send in military commanders and soldiers, and when we find their fingers on the triggers of the guns used to kill our men, we have a right to use military force to protect our soldiers and our people. We have the right to protect our people and our soldiers from any threat from any country, even domestic threats, even foreign threats.

This is a God-given, irrevocable right–the right to life.

If we do not act in accordance to our rights soon, Iran’s first target, Israel, will be fully justified in doing so first.

Conservatives, Awake!

April 14, 2007

Conservatives, awake!

If you are looking to the earth for the salvation of America, if you depend on the flesh for your liberty know this: There is no liberty, no goodness, no prosperity in the earth. The earth is fallen, it is in sin, and no good will come of it.

The source of our liberty is not our intellects, our guns, or our voices. It is God. Remember this! General Washington didn’t free the colonies by the power of his arm, but by relying on God’s arm!

Conservatives, turn back to God! Pray to God that he will free our nation from its ignorance and corruption. Pray that he will inspire leaders with his message of peace and liberty and prosperity, and pray that he will sustain the leaders we already have.

Whenever I remove God from the equation, I am always left in despair. Our political situation is weak. Our prospects of future success is weaker still. Our ultimate destination is Europe or worse.

But when I invite back God to my thinking, and when I rely on his arm and his strength, the path is clear. Despite all odds, we will win. Remember this:

  • Enoch built a righteous city in the middle of a wicked world.
  • Noah raised a nation from the ashes of a wicked world.
  • Abraham sought and found the God of his fathers despite the fallen state of his people.
  • Joseph found favor with the Pharoah and brought liberty and prosperity to an entire region with his faith.
  • Moses freed the Israelites against the greatest military force ever known at that time, and through mighty miracles brought them through wars and insurrections.
  • Joshua conquered mighty nations by his simple faith and strict obedience.
  • Gideon, with an army of a few hundred, drove away a vastly superior army, securing the liberty of the Israelites.
  • Paul, despite his mortal limitations, preached the gospel throughout a world that would not accept the gospel, and planted the seeds for a religion that would consume the world.
  • Settlers from Europe, arriving in a foreign land, secured their living and their security through their faith in God.
  • Colonists, too weak to raise a proper army, and consumed by bickering in the congress, were able to throw off the chains of the mightiest empire at the time with their faith in God.
  • Slaves were freed by faith in God.
  • World Wars I and II were won in desperate circumstances by the prayers of millions of mothers and sons.
  • The peninsula of Korea, the islans of Japan, the once wicked and savage nation of Germany, and millions of others are free today because of the prayers of the few Christians in those countries and in ours.
  • Israel is restored, against all odds, despite, at times, the entire world opposing their return. Their prayers were answered and are answered today.
  • The USSR, that threat to all of our freedoms, lay as a shadow of what it once was, unable to even muster an army to maintain its provinces, thanks to the prayers of millions around the world.

I’m not saying that prayer and faith and repentance alone will secure victory. I am saying that without prayer and faith and repentance there is no victory. I am saying that along with fighting the good fight, we must put our hopes and trust in God’s hands, and expect that he will do the right thing.

If we turn back to God, we will be invincible. If we don’t, we will be weak like every man. We will turn back to him, and listen for his will, and then execute upon it without doubt.

Democratic Party has become the Nazi Party

April 13, 2007

The Democratic Party has become the Nazi Party in the US. When the message of the Aryan Nations and the Democratic Party are the same, how can they be anything but the same?

More information available at Zombietimes.

It’s worth noting how Al Qaeda’s message, Iran’s message, Syria’s message, and the Democratic Party’s message have also converged.

Kurdistan Pashmerga Army: United States Must Stay

April 6, 2007

“I want you, as a reporter, as a journalist,” the general said to me, “to get our Kurdish voice to the American people so they know about Kurdish suffering in Iraq. We don’t want the American army to leave this area. The terrorists are excited about what is going on in the Congress.” (Michael J. Totten reports)

Because the Democratic Part is invested in our defeat, and because President Bush’s projection of the power of freedom has injured all the hopes and desires of communists, socialists and liberals of a world united in slavery to their ideals, they ignore every shred of good news to come out of Iraq.

By far the best news is in Kurdistan to the north of Baghdad. There, a modern country is already established, already functioning. If you visit there, you would think you were in Europe or somewhere in North America because of the culture, the spirit they have there.

If we only fought the war to give the Kurds their independence, (that was one of the reasons that President Bush cited) it would be justification for losing 5,000 American soldiers, no 100,000, perhaps even a million. We shed that much blood for the French, and the Kurds are certainly more deserving of it than them.

I am absolutely proud that whenever we go on the warpath to kill our enemies and destroy their governments, we leave behind allies closer than our closest current allies. We make friends in war, we leave the world free-er than it was when we found it. We take misery and convert it into happiness.

No other country in the world, except Britain and in rare instances some of the colonial European powers, can say that. We have given birth to the freedom of millions and millions of people, and soon that number will top billions.

One day, the vast majority of the world will owe their freedom to us, to the concept that “All men are created equal” and “endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights” and that governments exist to protect the rights of men.

We are the light to this darkened world, and I thank God daily that I was born here.

I pray that future generations of Americans will learn what being American really means, and learn why it is such a hated and loved name in this world today.

Mr. President, Charge the Speaker with Treason

April 5, 2007

Mr. President,

It is your duty according to the constitution to prosecute violations of the law. Encoded in our constitution is the definition of treason:

Article III, Section 3:

Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying war against them, or in adhering to their enemies, giving them aid and comfort. No person shall be convicted of treason unless on the testimony of two witnesses to the same overt act, or on confession in open court.

When members of congress are engaged in treason, the constitution is clear on when and how you can arrest, detain, question, and charge them:

Article I, Section 6:

They [senators and congressmen] shall in all cases, except treason, felony and breach of the peace, be privileged from arrest during their attendance at the session of their respective Houses, and in going to and returning from the same; and for any speech or debate in either House, they shall not be questioned in any other place. (emphasis added)

Mr. President, the constitution is clear. When someone adheres to our enemy by aiding and abetting them, they are guilty of treason. What Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi did by going over your power of foreign relations, meeting privately with an enemy who supports the terrorists, and plotting our country’s defeat is treason. She has access to all the documents you have access to. She knows as well as you do the threat that Syria poses to the world. Yet she refused to listen to reason and instead embraces our enemies in the middle of a war with them, a war where Syria is killing our young men and women.

You don’t have to wait until congress is out of session. The speaker can’t hide behind the doors of congress. You have the full power to enter into congress, while it is in session, and arrest her on charges of treason. You can arrest her and every other member of congress (republican or democrat) who is trying to help our enemies win this war. You can hold them and charge them with treason, preventing them from doing their business. When they are found guilty of their crimes, they will be sentenced according to the laws they have written.

These are serious times. Never before have our enemies been so bold in trying to secure our enemy’s victory. Never before have we faced such acts of treachery and treason. We must send a message to the world, to our country, and to our future: This behavior is intolerable, it is insufferable, and it is dangerous.

To all you leftist Kool-Aid drinkers out there, this treason I speak of is different than the invented treason of the left. They assume that because President Bush lied about the reason for war (he didn’t) that he is guilty of treason. Well, the definition of treason is above. Go read it again if you are confused. Even if he did lie (he didn’t), he could not be charged with treason.

Did the People Elect Democrats to Surrender?

April 5, 2007

The democrats are running around claiming that they have a mandate to end the war in Iraq because the people elected them to power.

Now, if the democrats ran on a platform of ending the war in Iraq, then I could believe them. But the fact is, the democrats ran on a platform of not ending the war in Iraq! Don’t believe me? Read these words by the senate minority leader, now senate majority leader, Sen. Harry Reid (D-NV):

“Now he’s the commander in chief, and we’re not going to anything to limit funding or cut off funds, even though there are some on the outside who suggest that.”

So Sen. Harry Reid promises not to undercut the war effort.

But, if you have been following politics for more than one day, you would know that having a D after your name means these things: (a) you are going to lie to get elected, (b) when you do get elected you are going to lie some more, and (c) you are going to abuse your power in whatever ways possible to assure that you stay elected, and most of all (d) you are going to blame the republicans for everything you are and do.

The fact of the matter is that the democrats do not have a strong political position on the war in Iraq. While they run around trying to pretend that the war in Iraq isn’t part of the Global War on Terror (in fact, they are trying to pretend that the GWOT doesn’t even exist), the enemy is sending everything they have to try and defeat us there.

And most of all, the American people do not want to lose, no matter what. The vast majority of America, as recent polling shows, wants us to win in Iraq, defeat Al Qaeda, and spread democracy in the Middle East.

“Geeks” are Atheist?

April 4, 2007

If you ever see someone walking around like they know everything, you are able to conclude exactly one thing about that person: They know nothing.

Here is an article that proves what I am saying.  (Link)

 On a Digg religion poll, out of a base of over four thousand votes taken, 45.56 percent are reported to be atheists.  This makes them the single largest religious group on Digg, followed closely by Christianity, at 29.08 percent.  Likewise, on Shuzak, a statistical examination of the 271 users who actually declared their religion showed the percentage of Atheists to be close to 70%.  Now, both of these are at least fairly accurate, given that they are most used by those who have strong opinions about their religion.  Now that we have shown that it is, in fact, a trend…

A self-selecting poll gives no information. Of this statisticians are sure. On-line polls are, by definition, self-selecting. There is no way to limit who can and can’t respond.

And yet, the author of this post thinks that the results of these two polls show that geeks are inherently atheist. All those polls really show is that Geeks who answer polls about religion on Digg and declare their religion on Shuzak to be predominately atheist. That is the only trend you can conclude.

It’s interesting that the author also cites a number of so-called Atheist scientists. Albert Einstein, for instance, is, in my mind, anything but an atheist. He concluded that Quantum Mechanics was not correct because there was a God and that God doesn’t play dice. He held that belief until his death. That is certainly not an atheist.

What’s more fascinating is that he starts his article with a quote from Voltaire: “If God did not exist, it would be necessary to invent him.” Well, here’s a fascinating quote, because it says, “If you are an atheist (hence, you believe God doesn’t exist), you would have to invent God. Hence, even an atheist can’t be an atheist.”

In my own experience, I have yet to find a real “geek” who is an atheist. I have exactly one geek friend that says he is an atheist, but really, when I questioned him, he considered men to be gods. That is, he doesn’t have faith in anything but humanity to save anyone. That certainly isn’t the definition of atheism that people who claim to be atheists wish to spread around. They would prefer no gods, not even man.

I ask any atheist to post a response to this. If you are truly an atheist, how do you reconcile the universe with your beliefs that there is no higher power?

Supreme Court is Out of Control

April 4, 2007

The government is allowed, folks, to regulate your breathing. At least, that’s what five people in black robes ruled.

I cannot lay my finger on the section of the constitution that gave the federal government any power to do any such thing. And yet, five people in black robes found it.

I see the first amendment, where no limits to our free speech are encoded into inviolable law. Yet, I am not allowed to donate money to candidates, say things before an election, or even breath without permission from the federal government.

I see the clause that says, “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.” I guess this includes breathing, because nowhere does it say in the constitution that the federal government can regulate my breathing.

I see the Article 1 Section 8 that lists all the laws that congress can write. I don’t see anything about pollution, global warming, or breathing in there.

Folks, what do we do with an institution that has grown outside of its constitutional authority? Why, we go to the Supreme Court, to ask them to make a ruling that they have grown outside their constitutional authority.

What do we do when that check and balance is no longer functioning?

We must exercise whatever power to restore order to that court. The only ways in which to restore order are to (a) elect a president and senate that will nominate and approve justices that believe the constitution means what it says, and (b) elect a house and a senate that will impeach members of the supreme court and remove them from office for gross violations of their duties.

Option (b) is obviously never going to happen until we get a congress that decides the constitution means what it says.  After all, they really enjoy the fact that the supreme court not only rubber-stamps their power-grabs from the people, but consistently takes more rights from the people and gives it to congress.

Option (a) is what we are working on and have been working on for the past 50 years. We are getting close. If one of these non-constitutional justices resigns or dies in office, then President Bush can nominate a constitutional justice, and perhaps through some miracle we will find one democrat in the senate who would support him.

But if option (a) fails, we turn to the second amendment to assert the rights of the people. That’s right, I said it. When the government fails to live within its constitutional authority, when they exceed the rights that the people have given it, it is the duty of the people to either destroy the government and establish a new one, or remind the government that they serve only because we allow them to serve.

Remember not to long ago, the citizens of Tennessee picked up their arms and marched on their capitol while it was in session, to remind the legislature that the people did not give them the right to create an income tax. There were no shots fired. There was no disorder. There was a political message stated at that time, the message being, “We are superior to you, and you must remember that.”

Perhaps one day in the near future, we can do something similar. Thousands, perhaps millions, of hard-working, red-blooded Americans can march through the streets of Washington D.C., each bearing arms fully loaded. I would be there. I would quit my job just to be there. It would be organized and ordered, of course. No shots would be fired. We wouldn’t have any signs but the American flag and perhaps our state flags. It would be a parade of power, demonstrating to the 535 members of congress, the 9 justices of the supreme court, and the 1 president, that they have no more power than that which the people allow them to have. It would send a message, “Either you live within the limits we have set two hundred years ago, or we will find new servants to be our government.”

And if the laws of Washington D.C. don’t allow armed citizens to march through its streets, well, they can write all the unjust laws they like and it won’t stop us. I am sure there were laws against that sort of thing in Tennessee as well.

Thing I Hate

April 4, 2007

There are a few things (not people) that I absolutely hate. These are the only things that really get me worked up, and are the only things I would kill for.

First is communism. The very concept that it is good to take forcefully from one person and give to another, no matter how disadvantaged the other is, is infuriating. The idea that this is a Christian idea is equally infuriating. Christ never forced even one of his followers to give something to the poor. In fact, we have a clear record where he said that it was requisite for salvation, and in that very instance, he also gave the rich man a choice. There was no force, only choice. Hence, by forcing people to give to the poor, they are actually removing the very thing that is Christian–the choice to give to the poor. Do you think those who are forced to give their money to the poor will find their way to the Kingdom of Heaven?

Next, is religious bigotry, as exemplified by anti-Christians, anti-Israelis, and the majority of the Moslem world. Yes, I said the majority. When you have religions or thoughts that teach it is okay to hate, abuse, torture and kill a person simply because of what they believe, that is pure evil. When a classroom of young Moslem girls rise up and murder their Christian teacher, then remove her corpse and burn it, that is evil. What makes it even more evil is when they think they are doing good.

Additionally, I hate the idea that any idea or concept or faith should be taught with the sword. If I don’t agree with you, your job is to persuade me, not to bludgeon me until I do believe with you. This is where the heart of the first two concepts that I hate lies. This concept of lashing out violently against those who disagree with you simply because they disagree is what spawned a protest where the protesters violently assaulted Karl Rove by throwing things at him. This is the same philosophy that guided Stalin, Castro, and the Black Panthers. This is the same philosophy that guides Al Qaeda, the Mullahs of Iran, and every enemy of the United States.

The final thing I hate is  that people refuse to defend themselves or their neighbors when faced with violence. Those who use violence only understand more violence. Those who live by the sword only understand the sword. When you are threatened, the only appropriate response is to threaten back. When you are attacked, the only response is to attack them even more. This lady who was murdered at the University of Washington was murdered because she refused to defend herself. Now she is dead. If women were trained to stand up to violent men, if they were taught how to use violent means to defend themselves, they wouldn’t have to live in fear. The same is true for communities and cities and nations. If we stand up to criminals, punishing them for their crimes, if we kill those who try to kill us, if we destroy those who try to destroy us, we will be safe. Indeed, this is the only path to safety. Anything else is the path to bondage and fear.

That’s what makes this Iran hostage thingy so infuriating. Why won’t the British defend their sailors? Do they not value their soldiers, and do they not value their respect? Why is a third-world country, led by a madman that threatens the free world with destruction allowed to freely capture free people? Let the world know, Britain, that you are not weak, that you do not negotiate with terrorists, and that your soldiers and sailors are to be treated with respect and dignity by the entire world! Let the world know that those who do not obey the rules of foreign diplomacy do not negotiate with you, but instead can only expect a violent end to their administrations!

I wake up every morning hoping to read that we have either invaded Iran or destroyed their military capability. The last thing I want to see is to have my children grow up in a world where America is not feared nor respected, where any madman can make threats to their lives and get away with it, and where America has to respect the wishes of the violent and insane.